 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| United States v. Ghilarducci, No. 05-10499, No. 05-10508,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants' mail fraud and money laundering convictions were affirmed because the evidence was sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to conclude that defendants did intend to defraud the investors and denial of motion to sever was proper because the defenses were not so mutually antagonistic as to require severance of defendants.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hayder, No. 06-10394,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court erred in increasing a base offense level for obstruction of justice under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines § 3C1.1 where defendant's use of a birth certificate under an alias occurred before any investigation had been undertaken, not during the course of the investigation; thus he had not significantly obstructed the investigation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Shang, No. 06-15354,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's ineffectiveness of counsel Sixth Amendment claim failed because he did not show that his trial counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. Any reliance by counsel on a Merritt defense was not per se unreasonable, because Merritt did not, contrary to defendant's assertion, conflict with Ninth Circuit law.
|
|||||
| Velez v. Wynne, No. 04-17425,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although hours were all related to all claims in plaintiff's complaint, district court was still obligated to consider results obtained in relation to scope of trial in calculating the lodestar figure. District court abused its discretion when it reduced lodestar amount by 25 percent based on finding that plaintiff did not obtain total victory.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
